Address · Ward 3 · Amber Morley
20 Cordova Ave
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 3 · Amber Morley
- Location
- 43.64818, -79.52796
- How this address was located
- Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
3These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 8 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Councillor Grimes, Ward 3 | Councillor staff | 9 | 6 | 26 July 2019 |
| Amber Morley | Councillor staff | 5 | 2 | 16 January 2024 |
| Councillor Di Ciano | Councillor staff | 4 | 1 | 7 March 2018 |
| Mayor's Office | Councillor staff | 3 | 3 | 5 April 2019 |
| Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 7 March 2018 |
| Amber Morley | Member of council | 2 | 0 | 12 January 2024 |
| Mayor John Tory | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 15 May 2019 |
| Ward 3 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 1 | 0 | 26 July 2019 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM27958 | Minto Communities Inc. | 20 Cordova Avenue | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 3 April 2019 – 2 April 2027 | 1 |
| SM27119 | Minto Communities Inc. | 20 Cordova Avenue | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 3 December 2018 – 31 December 2026 | 20 |
| SM25621 | MUCI ACQ Inc. | 20 Cordova Ave | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 5 February 2018 – 30 June 2019 | 6 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 22 October 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 229241 WET 03 CDUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 8 June 2021Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 21 167492 WET 03 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 November 2018Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 18 257584 WET 05 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 229241 WET 03 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 22 October 2021 | Under Review In progress |
| 21 167492 WET 03 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 8 June 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 18 257584 WET 05 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 16 November 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
Linked lobbying registrations
These links are inferred by lobbyTO from file numbers and addresses named in the registration (task L2); the registry does not record which application a registration concerns.
Links between records are inferred by a model and are not reviewed by a person. Each link shows its score out of 1; moderate-confidence links (0.7 to 0.9) are wrong more often than high-confidence links. How links are scored
12 Cordova Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
18 257584 WET 05 OZ · submitted 16 November 2018 · Closed · from registration SM27284 (Minto Cordova LP)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.89
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM27284: Official Plan and Zoning application to permit a 27 storey apartment building containing 327 units at 12 - 20 Cordova Avenue. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 257584 WET 05 OZ at 12 Cordova Ave: Proposal for a terraced 27-storey apartment building stepping down to the Islington Village area to the north. A total of 325 residential units are anticipated, with a proposed density of 9.59 FSI. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Official Plan and Zoning application to permit a 27 storey apartment building containing 327 units at 12 - 20 Cordova Avenue.
Matched fields
- address
- 12-20 CORDOVA AVE
- application_address
- 12 CORDOVA AVE
12 Cordova Ave · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
18 257584 WET 05 OZ · submitted 16 November 2018 · Closed · from registration SM27958 (Minto Communities Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.70
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM27958: Redevelopment of 12, 16, 18 and 20 Cordova Avenue (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 257584 WET 05 OZ at 12 Cordova Ave: Proposal for a terraced 27-storey apartment building stepping down to the Islington Village area to the north. A total of 325 residential units are anticipated, with a proposed density of 9.59 FSI. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of 12, 16, 18 and 20 Cordova Avenue
Matched fields
- address
- 20 CORDOVA AVE
- application_address
- 20 CORDOVA AVE
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 3
24 lobbied · 100 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 24 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 4% | 0.25 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 100 | — | 71% (n=10) | 29% | 4% | 0.14 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 97% (n=98) | 3% | 3% | 0.04 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.
Development applications
Lobbied applications are compared only with unlobbied applications of the same type, in the same ward, submitted in the same year and of the same size band (units or floor area from the description; sub-type for Committee of Adjustment files). Unlobbied applications are weighted to match the lobbied group. Raw lobbied versus unlobbied averages are not reported.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 3
37 lobbied · 72 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 37 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 16% | 0.27 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 72 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 15% | 0.04 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 96% (n=78) | 4% | 14% | 0.05 |
Submission to the first decision status seen in our daily loads (measured from launch). Approval and refusal rates are among applications with a recorded decision.
Large and complex applications attract both lobbying and longer reviews, and matching cannot remove every difference between applications, so a difference does not show that lobbying changed how an application was reviewed.
Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.